CHAPTER III

LUTHER'S CONCEPTION OF THE CALLING

TASK OF THE INVESTIGATION

Now it is unmistakable that even in the German word Beruf,
and perhaps still more clearly in the English calling, a religious conception,
that of a task set by God, is at least suggested. The more emphasis is
put upon the word in a concrete case, the more evident is the connotation.
And if we trace the history of the word through the civilized languages,
it appears that neither the predominantly Catholic peoples nor those of
classical antiquity have possessed any expression of similar connotation
for what we know as a calling (in the sense of a life-task, a definite
field in which to work), while one has existed for all predominantly Protestant
peoples. It may be further shown that this is not due to any ethnical peculiarity
of the languages concerned. It is not, for instance, the product of a Germanic
spirit, but in its modern meaning the word comes from the Bible translations,
through the spirit of the translator, not that of the original. In Luther's
translation of the Bible it appears to have first been used at a point
in Jesus Sirach (x i. 20 and 21) precisely in our modern sense. After that
it speedily took on its present meaning in the everyday speech of all Pro-testant
peoples, while earlier not even a suggestion of such a meaning could be
found in the secular literature of any of them, and even, in religious
writings, so far as I can ascertain, it is only found in one of the German
mystics whose influence on Luther is well known.

Like the meaning of the word, the idea is new, a product
of the Reformation. This may be assumed as generally known. It is true
that certain suggestions of the positive valuation of routine activity
in the world, which is contained in this conception of the calling, had
already existed in the Middle Ages, and even in late Hellenistic antiquity.
We shall speak of that later. But at least one thing was unquestionably
new: the valuation of the fulfillment of duty in worldly affairs as the
highest form which the moral activity of the individual could assume. This
it was which inevitably gave every-day worldly activity a religious significance,
and which first created the conception of a calling in this sense. The
conception of the calling thus brings out that central dogma of all Protestant
denominations which the Catholic division. of ethical precepts into preecepta
and consilia discards. The only way of living acceptably to God was not
to surpass worldly morality in monastic asceticism, but solely through
the fulfillment of the obligations imposed upon the individual by his position
in the world. That was his calling.

Luther developed the conception in the course of the first
decade of his activity as a reformer. At first, quite in harmony with the
prevailing tradition of the Middle Ages, as represented, for example, by
Thomas Aquinas he thought of activity in the world as a thing of the flesh,
even though willed by God. It is the indispensable natural condition of
a life of faith, but in itself, like eating and drinking, morally neutral.
But with the development of the conception of sola fide in all its consequences,
and its logical result, the increasingly sharp emphasis against the Catholic
consilia evangelica of the monks as dictates of the devil, the calling
grew in importance. The monastic life is not only quite devoid of value
as a means of justification before God, but he also looks upon its renunciation
of the duties of this world as the product of selfishness, withdrawing
from temporal obligations. In contrast, labor in a calling appears to him
as the outward expression of brotherly love. This he proves by the observation
that the division of labor forces every individual to work for others,
but his viewpoint is highly naive, forming an almost grotesque contrast
to Adam Smith's well known statements on the same subject. However, this
justification, which is evidently essentially scholastic, soon disappears
again, and there remains, more and more strongly emphasized, the statement
that the fulfillment of worldly duties is under all circumstances the only
way to live acceptably to God. It and it alone is the will of God, and
hence every legitimate calling has exactly the same worth in the sight
of God.

That this moral justification of worldly activity was
one of the most important results of the Reformation, especially of Luther's
part in it, is beyond doubt, and may even be considered a platitude. This
attitude is worlds removed from the deep hatred of Pascal, in his contemplative
moods, for all worldly activity, which he was deeply convinced could only
be understood in terms of vanity or low cunning. And it differs even more
from the liberal utilitarian compromise with the world at which the Jesuits
arrived. But just what the practical significance of this achievement
of Protestantism was in detail is dimly felt rather than clearly perceived.

In the first place it is hardly necessary to point out
that Luther cannot be claimed for the spirit of capitalism in the sense
in which we have used that term above, or for that matter in any sense
whatever. The religious circles which today most enthusiastically celebrate
that great achievement of the Reformation are by no means friendly to capitalism
in any sense. And Luther himself would, without doubt, have sharply repudiated
any connection with a point of view like that of Franklin. Of course, one
cannot consider his complaints against the great merchants of his time,
such as the Fuggers, as evidence in this case. For the struggle against
the privileged position, legal or actual, of single great trading companies
in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries may best be compared with the
modem campaign against the trusts, and can no more justly be considered
in itself an expression of a traditionalistic point of view. Against these
people, against the Lombards, the monopolists, speculators, and bankers
patronized by the Anglican Church and the kings and parliaments of England
and France, both the Puritans and the Huguenots carried on a bitter struggle.
Cromwell, after the battle of Dunbar (September 1650), wrote to the Long
Parliament: "Be pleased to reform the abuses of all professions: and if
there be any one that makes many poor to make a few rich, that suits not
a Commonwealth." But, nevertheless, we will find Cromwell following a quite
specifically capitalistic line of thought . On the other hand, Luther's
numerous statements against usury or interest in any form reveal a conception
of the nature of capitalistic acquisition which, compared with that of
late Scholasticism, is, from a capitalistic viewpoint, definitely backward.
Especially, of course , the doctrine of the sterility of money which Anthony
of Florence had already refuted.

But it is unnecessary to go into detail. For, above all
the consequences of the conception of the calling in the religious sense
for worldly conduct were susceptible to quite different interpretations.
The effect of the Reformation as such was only that, as compared with the
Catholic attitude, the moral emphasis on and the religious sanction of,
organized worldly labor in a calling was mightily increased. The way in
which the concept of the calling, which expressed this change, should develop
further depended upon the religious evolution which now took place in the
different Protestant Churches. The authority of the Bible, from which Luther
thought he had derived his idea of the calling, on the whole favored a
traditionalistic interpretation. The old Testament, in particular, though
in the genuine prophets it showed no sign of a tendency to excel worldly
morality, and elsewhere only in quite isolated rudiments and suggestions,
contained a similar religious idea entirely in this traditionalistic sense.
Everyone should abide by his living and let the godless run after gain.
That is the sense of all the statements which bear directly on worldly
activities. Not until the Talmud is a partially, but not even then fundamentally,
different attitude to be found. The personal attitude of Jesus is characterized
in classical purity by the typical antique Oriental plea: "Give us this
day our daily bread." The element of radical repudiation of the world,
as expressed in the (Greek term), excluded the possibility that the modern
idea of calling should be based on his personal authority. In the apostolic
era as expressed in the New Testament, especially in St. Paul, the Christian
looked upon worldly activity either with indifference, or at least essentially
traditionalistically; for those first generations were filled with eschatological
hopes. Since everyone was simply waiting for the coming of the Lord, there
was nothing to do but remain in the station and in the worldly occupation
in which the call of the Lord had found him, and labor as before. Thus
he would not burden his brothers as an object of charity, and it would
only be for a little while. Luther read the Bible through the spectacles
of his whole attitude; at the time and in the course of his development
from about 1518 to 1530 this not only remained traditionalistic but became
ever more so.

In the first years of his activity as a reformer he was,
since he thought of the calling as primarily of the flesh, dominated by
an attitude closely related, in so far as the form of world activity was
concerned, to the Pauline eschatological indifference as expressed in I
Cor. vii. One may attain salvation in any walk of life; on the short pilgrimage
of life there is no use in laying weight on the form of occupation. The
pursuit of material gain beyond personal needs must thus appear as a symptom
of lack of grace, and since it can apparently only be attained at the expense
of others, directly reprehensible. As he became increasingly involved in
the affairs of the world, he came to value work in the world more highly.
But in the concrete calling an individual pursued he saw more and more
a special command of God to fulfill these particular duties which the Divine
Will had imposed upon him. And after the conflict with the Fanatics and
the peasant disturbances, the objective historical order of things in which
the individual has been placed by God becomes for Luther more and more
a direct manifestation of divine will. The stronger and stronger emphasis
on the providential element, even in particular events of life, led more
and more to a traditionalistic interpretation based on the idea of Providence.
The individual should remain once and for all in the station and calling
in which God had placed him, and should restrain hi' worldly activity within
the limits imposed by his established station in life. While his economic
traditionalism was originally the result of Pauline indifference, it later
became that of a more and more intense belief in divine providence, which
identified absolute obedience to God's will, with absolute acceptance of
things as they were. Starting from this background, it was impossible for
Luther to establish a new or in any way fundamental connection between
worldly activity and religious principles. His acceptance of purity of
doctrine as the one infallible criterion of the Church, which became more
and more irrevocable after the struggles of the twenties, was in itself
sufficient to check the development of new points of view in ethical matters.

Thus for Luther the concept of the calling remained traditionalistic.
His calling is something which man has to accept as a divine ordinance,
to which he must adapt himself. This aspect outweighed the other idea which
was also present, that work in the calling was a, or rather the, task set
by God. And in its further development, orthodox Lutheranism emphasized
this aspect still more. Thus, for the time being, the only ethical result
was negative; worldly duties were no longer subordinated to ascetic' ones;
obedience to authority and the acceptance of things as they were, were
preached. In this Lutheran form the idea of a calling had, as will be shown
in our discussion of medieval religious ethics, to a considerable extent
been anticipated by the German mystics. Especially in Tauler's equalization
of the values of religious and worldly occupations, and the decline in
valuation of the traditional forms of ascetic practices on account of the
decisive significance of the ecstatic-contemplative absorption of the divine
spirit by the soul. To a certain extent Lutheranism means a step backward
from the mystics, in so far as Luther, and still more his Church, had,
as compared with the mystics, partly undermined the psychological foundations
for a rational ethics. (The mystic attitude on this point is reminiscent
partly of the Pietest and partly of the Quaker psychology of faith.) That
was precisely because he could not but suspect the tendency to ascetic
self discipline of leading to salvation by works, and hence he and his
Church were forced to keep it more and more in the background.

Thus the mere idea of the calling in the Lutheran sense
is at best of questionable importance for the problems in which we are
interested. This was all that was meant to be determined here. But this
is not in the least to say that even the Lutheran form of the renewal of
the religious life may not have had some practical significance for the
objects of our investigation; quite the contrary. Only that significance
evidently cannot be derived directly from the attitude of Luther and his
Church to worldly activity, and is perhaps not altogether so easily grasped
as the connection with other branches of Protestantism. It is thus well
for us next to look into those forms in which a relation between practical
life and a religious motivation can be more easily perceived than in Lutheranism.
We have already called attention to the conspicuous part played by Calvinism
and the Protestant sects in the history of capitalistic development. As
Luther found a different spirit at work in Zwingli than in himself, so
did his spiritual successors in Calvinism. And Catholicism has to the present
day looked upon Calvinism as its real opponent.

Now that may be partly explained on purely political grounds.
Although the Reformation is unthinkable without Luther's own personal religious
development, and was spiritually long influenced by his personality, without
Calvinism his work could not have had permanent concrete success. Nevertheless,
the reason for this common repugnance of Catholics and Lutherans lies,
at least partly, in the ethical peculiarities of Calvinism. A purely superficial
glance shows that there is here quite a different relationship between
the religious life and earthly activity than in either Catholicism or Lutheranism.
Even in literature motivated purely by religious factors that is evident.
Take for instance the end of the Divine Comedy, where the poet in Paradise
stands speechless in his passive contemplation of the secrets of God,
and compare it with the poem which has come to be called the Divine
Comedy of Puritanism. Milton closes the last song of ParadiseLost after describing the expulsion from paradise as follows:-

"They, looking back, all the eastern side beheld Of paradise, so late their happy scat, Waved over by that flaming brand; the gate With dreadful faces thronged and fiery arms. Some natural tears they dropped, but wiped them soon: The world was all before them, there to choose Their place of rest, and Providence their guide."

And only a little before Michael had said to Adam:

. . . "Only add Deeds to thy knowledge answerable; add faith; Add virtue, patience, temperance; add love, By name to come called Charity, the soul Of all the rest: then wilt thou not be loth To leave this Paradise, but shall possess A Paradise within thee, happier far."

One feels at once that this powerful expression of the
Puritan's serious attention to this world, his acceptance of his life in
the world as a task, could not possibly have come from the pen of a medieval
writer. But it is just as uncongenial to Lutheranism, as expressed for
instance in Luther's and Paul Gerhard's chorales. It is now our task to
replace this vague feeling by a somewhat more precise logical formulation,
and to investigate the fundamental basis of these differences. The appeal
to national character is generally a mere confession of ignorance, and
in this case it is entirely untenable. To ascribe a unified national character
to the Englishmen of the seventeenth century would be simply to falsify
history. Cavaliers and Roundheads did not appeal to each other simply as
two parties, but a radically distinct species of men, and whoever look
into the matter carefully must agree with them. 0n the other hand, a difference
of character between the English merchant adventurers and the old Hanseatic
merchants is not to be found; nor can any other fundamental difference
between the English and German characters at the end of the Middle Ages,
which cannot easily be explained by the differences of their political
history. It was the power of religious influence, not alone, but more than
anything else, which created the differences of which we are conscious
today.

We thus take as our starting point in the investigation
of the relationship between the old Protestant ethic and the spirit of
capitalism the works of Calvin, of Calvinism, and the other Puritan sects.
But it is not to be understood that we expect to find any of the founders
or representatives of these religious movements considering the promotion
of what we have called the spirit of capitalism as in any sense the end
of his life-work. We cannot well maintain that the pursuit of worldly goods,
conceived as a n end in itself, was to any of them of positive ethical
value. Once and for all it must be remembered that programs of ethical
reform never were at the center of interest for any of the religious reformers
(among whom, for our purposes, we must include men like Menno, George Fox,
and Wesley). They were not the founders of societies for ethical culture
nor the proponents of humanitarian projects for social reform or cultural
ideals. The salvation of the soul and that alone was the center of
their life and work. Their ethical ideals and the practical results of
their doctrines were all based on that alone, and were the consequences
of purely religious motives. We shall thus have to admit that the cultural
consequences of the Reformation were to a great extent, perhaps in the
particular aspects with which we are dealing predominantly, unforeseen
and even unwished for results of the labors of the reformers. They were
often far removed from or even in contradiction to all that they themselves
thought to attain.

The following study may thus perhaps in a modest way form
a contribution to the understanding of the manner in which ideas become
effective forces in history. In order, however, to avoid any misunderstanding
of the sense in which any such effectiveness of purely ideal motives is
claimed at all, I may perhaps be permitted a few remarks in conclusion
to this introductory discussion.

In such a study, it may at once be definitely stated,
no attempt is made to evaluate the ideas of the Reformation in any sense,
whether it concern their social or their religious worth. We have continually
to deal with aspects of the Reformation which must appear to the truly
religious consciousness as incidental and even superficial. For we are
merely attempting to clarify the part which religious forces have played
in forming the developing web of our specifically worldly modern culture,
in the complex interaction of innumerable different historical factors.
We are thus inquiring only to what extent certain characteristic features
of this culture can be imputed to the influence of the Reformation. At
the same time we must free ourselves from the idea that it is possible
to deduce the Reformation, as a historically necessary result, from certain
economic changes. Countless historical circumstances, which cannot be reduced
to any economic law, and are not susceptible of economic explanation of
any sort, especially purely political processes, had to concur in order
that the newly created Churches should survive at all.

On the other hand, however, we have no intention whatever
of maintaining such a foolish and doctrinaire thesis as that the spirit
of capitalism (in the provisional sense of the term explained above) could
only have arisen as the result of certain effects of the Reformation, or
even that capitalism as an economic system is a creation of the Reformation.
In itself, the fact that certain important forms of capitalistic business
organization are known to be considerably older than the Reformation is
a sufficient refutation of such a claim On the contrary, we only wish to
ascertain whether and to what extent religious forces have taken part in
qualitative formation and the quantitative expansion of that spirit over
the world. Furthermore, what concrete aspects of our capitalistic culture
can be traced to them, In view of the tremendous confusion of interdependent
influences between the material basis, the forms of social and political
organization, and the ideas current in the time of the Reformation, we
can only proceed by investigating whether and at what points certain correlations
between forms of religious belief and practical ethics can be worked out.
At the same time we shall as far as possible clarify the manner and the
general direction in which, by virtue of those relationships, the religious
movements have influenced the development of material culture. Only when
this has been determined with reasonable accuracy can the attempt be made
to estimate to what extent the historical development of modern culture
can be attributed to those religious forces and to what extent to others.